Aquesta Specialized Uropathology, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Histopathology. 2017 Dec;71(6):918-925. doi: 10.1111/his.13311. Epub 2017 Oct 2.
AIMS: In 2012, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) introduced a novel grading system for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and papillary renal cell carcinoma. This system is incorporated into the latest World Health Organization renal tumour classification, being designated WHO/ISUP grading. This study was undertaken to compare WHO/ISUP and Fuhrman grading and to validate WHO/ISUP grading as a prognostic parameter in a series of clear cell RCC. METHODS AND RESULTS: Analysis of 681 cases of ccRCC showed that 144 tumours could not be assigned a Fuhrman grade on the basis of ambiguous grading features. The application of WHO/ISUP grading resulted in a general down-grading of cases when compared with Fuhrman grading. In a sub-group of 374 cases, for which outcome data were available, 9.3% were WHO/ISUP grade 1, 50.3% were grade 2, 24.1% grade 3 and 16.3% grade 4, while the distribution of Fuhrman grades was 0.4% grade 1, 48.7% grade 2, 29.4% grade 3 and 21.5% grade 4. There were no recurrence/metastases amongst patients with WHO/ISUP grade 1 tumours and there was a significant difference in outcome for WHO/ISUP grades 2, 3 and 4. For Fuhrman grading the cancer-free survival was not significantly different for grade 2 and grade 3 tumours. On multivariate analysis WHO/ISUP grade and pT staging category were found to retain prognostic significance. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that FG cannot be applied in >20% of cases of ccRCC and the WHO/ISUP provides superior prognostic information.
目的:2012 年,国际泌尿病理学会(ISUP)引入了一种新的透明细胞肾细胞癌(ccRCC)和乳头状肾细胞癌分级系统。该系统被纳入最新的世界卫生组织肾脏肿瘤分类,被指定为 WHO/ISUP 分级。本研究旨在比较 WHO/ISUP 和 Fuhrman 分级,并验证 WHO/ISUP 分级作为一系列透明细胞 RCC 的预后参数。
方法和结果:对 681 例 ccRCC 病例进行分析,发现 144 例肿瘤因分级特征不明确而无法进行 Fuhrman 分级。与 Fuhrman 分级相比,WHO/ISUP 分级的应用导致病例普遍降级。在可获得结局数据的 374 例亚组中,9.3%为 WHO/ISUP 分级 1,50.3%为分级 2,24.1%为分级 3,16.3%为分级 4,而 Fuhrman 分级的分布为 0.4%为分级 1,48.7%为分级 2,29.4%为分级 3,21.5%为分级 4。WHO/ISUP 分级 1 肿瘤患者无复发/转移,WHO/ISUP 分级 2、3 和 4 患者的结局存在显著差异。对于 Fuhrman 分级,2 级和 3 级肿瘤的无癌生存率无显著差异。多变量分析显示,WHO/ISUP 分级和 pT 分期类别保留了预后意义。
结论:该研究表明,FG 不能应用于>20%的 ccRCC 病例,而 WHO/ISUP 提供了更优的预后信息。
Pathologe. 2016-7
Am J Surg Pathol. 2013-3
Pathology. 2019-4-12
Biomedicines. 2025-2-21